What's wrong with North-Korea?

Plainly fools or group-think gone wrong?

The last time North-Korea was whipping they needed money.  Their population was starving and they needed the money and international help to get the food.  The way they went about it?  They menaced to invade South-Korea and all that stuff.  They cried so lound doing the bacon slice on the floor like a child that the International community bought peace and allowed the help to North-Korea.

What does happen when you reward a child for bad behavior?  That's it!  He does it again.

What is it this time?  Starving again? Or the young new impetuous ruler wants to show the world who can piss the farther?  He is young, and when you're young you think you're invincible and strong and that you know it all.  May be he wants to play with his toys?

But what if some or most of the North-Korean army's generals think the same?  What if they fell into a dangerous group-think and they actually think they do have a chance?

What is group-think?  Well go to Wikipedia for the formal definition.  I'll explain it to you with a simple example.  Everyone lived this kind of situation when we were in high-school.  Do you remember this guy or this girl that everybody were making fun of?  Most of you I guess, just like me, thought once why do we do this to this person?  For what reason?  Was it justified?  But nobody did or said anything.  We just went by either doing nothing or joining the group.  That is group-think.

Why do we do that?  The one who breaks the group-think is ostracized from the group.  Therefore there is more pain and negative outcome in re-establishing facts or justice than saying nothing.  Therefore nobody does anything.

So I am sure that, after what?  40 years of military parades, military tests and aggressive sporadic attacks against South-Korea, without any meaningful retaliation, the North-Koreans may thing that they are as strong as they think they are.  And now they are waiting for the faintest reason to officially declare war.  They are eating their own propaganda.

Why don't they just attack unilaterally?  China.  Their allied China wouldn't accept it.  But if they act as if they defend themselves.  Then may be China will just stand aside and let North-Korea have its dance.  Just like all the world nations stood aside from America went it attacked Irak after the 9-11 events.  America felt it was in its right to defend itself and nobody opposed.

We shall see I guess on April 15th.

April 15th is the National feast for North-Korea and they always go out their way to celebrate grandiosely on that day.

They may start the war on that significant date.   

Want to get clever at strategy? Learn poker!

Poker is a game of chance?  Think again.  Can you explain to me why is it the same 15 to 20 people that ends up in the last table in the poker championships?

Is it because they are more lucky than anyone on Earth when it comes to poker games?

Poker is a game of skills and calculation.  And yes there is some luck involved.  But what is truly shuffling the cards is the bluffs.  You can have the best hand at the table.  You can be beaten by an opponent that has merely a pair of 2s if you don't have the nerves to carry his "all in" bluff on that turn.

The bluffs mess with the statistics of the game and blurs the chance factor.

Basically in poker you have to play with the cards you have been dealt with. Isn't it what we also say about life?

Playing with the best advantages you have, bluff, learning about your opponents... Doesn't it sound like the business world to you?  And yet there is no poker game learning in the economics or business schools curriculum.

One academic professor stood out of the shadow.  Charles Nesson of the Harvard Law School.  Nesson believes that learning poker is good for his law students.  That they could use its skills in the court when they'll become lawyers.  That's a start.  But it could go much further.

How about using those skills in negotiating a contract?  In buying a company?  In negotiating trade treaties between two countries?  Or merely negotiating the price on this new car you want to buy?   

You could use poker skills everywhere in your life.  And there is much games theory involved in it I would like to see more economists paying attention to it.

If you want to become a good strategist.  You will have to learn how to play poker.  Settle an account on Pokerstars.com  and start learning.

But beware!  If you involve money, there is risks of addiction.  Be strong willed and don't fall into that pit.  In fact in poker, just as everything else in life, you should always follow these two basic rules:

1.  Net play with money that you don't have.
2.  Always follow rule number 1.

Have a look at this article for more information.

Grey Eminence

As per Wikipedia.  Its "Grey Eminence" is "a powerful decision-maker or advisor who operates "behind the scenes" or in a non-public or unofficial capacity."

And I wonder?  Is it best to work in bright light in reaching your goals?  And therefore being prone of being criticized and openly opposed?  Thus slowing you down.  Or is it better to work below the radar?  Work behind the curtain?

Working behind the curtain has its value.  You can plot.  Organize and prepare without the opponent suspicion.  This brings you an adventage when the project will go full blast in the day light.  The opponent will have to play catch up instead of plain opposition.  And if you plan well, you would have planned the opponent's opposing arguments and moves before hand.  Thus neutralizing its effect before its strength catch up.

There must be another kind of satisfaction also.  Seeing that things are going your way and nobody really notice why or care to.  To them, it just happens.  It give you a clear view as well.  Without direct opposition you can devote your energy in proactivity instead of reactivity.  this gives you another edge.

But this also gives you the reputation of someone plotting and untrustworthy.  That is... if people discover that you are behind all this.  

And of course I am not talking about plotting against someone or to do arm and all.  So with that in mind.  Your reputation would be safe.

I've read somewhere that, when every you evolve or get better at anything.  People surrounding you (as surprising as it may sound) will try to subjugate you.  Seeing you go forward disturbs them.  They see their own leniency and laziness to their own face and its a disturbing thought.  So they try to bring you back down to their level.  

They don't do that to be bad or mischievous. They barely are aware of what they are doing and why. So why bother unnecessary opposition?  This is energy you can allocate somewhere else more effectively.

The idea is not to hide everything to everyone.  If you do you miss the point.  The idea is to avoid unnecessary criticism.

Burn the ships!

Click here

What is it that holds you off all the time?

I know there is something you long to do.  But always managed to postpone.  Loosing weight; finding the girl of your life (aka approaching and flirting); starting a business; leaving your spouse (yes yes... lets be honest that is one of the things some have in mind).  Is it writing a book?  Go back to school?  Changing job?

The list can go on for ever here.

The reason for not taking action.  THAT is the thing one must focus on.  In the short term, the rest is just fog.

For example lets say you want to loose weight.  A millions things goes into your mind:  I cannot start this week because its the holidays... then next week I will allow myself to cheat because its Ben's wedding... Ho!  What the hell... just this once...  And so on...

That is all babbles.  There is a reason underneath all that which prevents you from really taking action.  Are you afraid of not being able to complete?  Thus never starting.  Are you afraid of what the other people will say?  Are you afraid to loose some friends and loved ones for what ever reason?  In other words, what is the true reason that prevents you from taking action.

Then its on that reason you must focus.

How do you deal with it?  Burn the ships!

When Cortez arrived into Mexico, he wanted the gold that the Aztecs had.  But his soldiers where not convinced.  All reasons were good.  Some caught unknown fevers so were afraid to go forward in this foreign land.  The Aztecs were thousands and the Spanish were just a few hundreds.  All reasons were good and most wanted to go back to Europe.  So Cortez ordered to put fire to the ships.  Thus cutting all possible hope of retreat back to Spain.

The soldiers' only choice was then to go forward... and win!  They simply were cut of any other choice.

Just do the same in your life.  Cut your ships.  And make sure you have no choice other than undertake what ever your were procrastinating about and win!

On clever oppositions

Click here

I love to see two opponents clash when they arrives at diametrically opposed interests.

Obama against Romney.  Kasparov against Big Blue (I know its a machine but it was never the less a protagonist).  Raphael Nadal against  Roger Federer... And even fictional characters:  Superman against Lex Luthor.  Sherlock Holmes against James Moriarty.  And so on...

There is something in conflict that brings us forward.  We have to surpass ourselves when we meet an opponent that is at "our level".  And this accomplishment leaves something that makes us better.  Without it.  Our progression would be much slower.

Karl Marx said that every theses brings its antitheses and the collision between the two brings a syntheses...

So never refuse a good fight.  Praise it.  Of course don't fall into it with both eyes closed and without respecting any rules of strategy.  But never turn your back.  Its a way to guage yourself.  See where you are at.  Learn from this and improve.

Link of the week - The capitalist class

Are you a member of the capitalist class?

Lets see.

Are you making between $350 to $500K in revenue per annum?

No?  You are not from the capitalist class.

Yes?  Then wait.  You're not there yet.  Are you making your money from a salary or other means of income?  In other words.  If you stop providing your time, does the revenue stream stops or does it remains?

If your revenue is linked to time you put in.  You are not a member of the capitalist class.  Sorry.

A true capitalist value his time more than his money.  So he works in generating revenues that are not linked to his time.  Royalties, interests, dividends, capital gain, etc...

I suggest you go and read the article on that link.

Its concepts are very insightful.  And even if you are on the path of growing.  Both personally and financially.  You will find the ideas presented compelling.

Have a good read.

What is it with Mali?

I mean what is in Mali?  There is no oil that I know of.  There is no diamond mines like in southern Africa.  So why are the french so prone to attack and stop the jihadists advance?

Lets not be mistaken here.  The French did not attack out of the blue.  Mali have asked for help to the UN previously.  Help that has been "granted" but under an agenda:  Lets try to speak first and punch later if needs be.

The only thing the French did is to skip a few months on the calendar.  But they do have the UN approval.  So they are not illegal in their action. (Not like the US in Irak but lets pass this one now).

This fight of the French against the Muslim radicals is not new.  Back in the colonialist time the French had won against the Muslims there in 1850s.  And this victory sealed the French supremacy on that part of Africa.

This particular part of Africa is very French sensitive.  Most of the countries there are former French colonies.  They speak French.  They have economic ties with Paris.  And there is French citizens working there.  So it is understandable that the French feels compelled of doing something.  And their need for speed of action can be understood too.  Look at the following map of Mali.

 

The Islamists are in the north of the country.  But in the last weeks, they defeated the Malian army and took control of  Mopti region (in the center).  By doing so they literally cut the country in two and the road to the capital Bamako is wide open.  And since the capital has no access to the north.  It leaves the Islamists to do their "re education", religious cleaning, indoctrination or what ever is their aim with the local population.  Nor to say that if the Islamists are left to progress and take Bamako.  Then the country falls.  And it is much harder to take back an entire country than being invited in by the president and fight pockets of enemies.  

Thus the French fast intervention to stop the advance first.  And second: push them back to some retrenchment pockets so the capital can have access to the North of the country. That way the population won't have time to be exposed to the Islamists for long and deeper problem are avoided such as population suffering from the Stockholm syndrome and start defending their invaders instead of their liberators (by choice, by fear or by indoctrination... what ever).

But is that all there is?  Is it worth it to spend billions in defending a country that has merely no natural resources?   Risking killing its own solders in the process.  And not to say that France is already... lets say... challenged by a national debt and an anemic economy?  I mean they are spending billions that they don't have.  A luxury they cannot afford.  All that to defend a country that has significantly nothing to offer as retribution?

I mean lets take the US intervention in Irak.  USA didn't have the money either.  They are stretched financially to.  But there is the oil!  Millions of barrels that helps paying for the war.

There must be something else.

I know the French said that they are doing it for Mali's democracy.  And to protect the population.  And to protect the French citizens that are already there.  And to stabilize the region.  Its all noble reasons.  But what I am interested in is to know what are the other reasons that justifies the action?  The bully doesn't want to loose his hold on this regional sandbox?  Ok I understand that.  Mali is well positioned strategically for the French.  Its right in the middle of most French speaking African countries.  So establishing a military base there (we're just talking here) would put them at the center of the party if something else develops in the neighboring area.  Thus securing the region.

There is another thought that came to me.  How about re inventing imperialism?  I mean imperialism as we know it has bad press these days.  So lets do it otherwise.  Lets not invade and impose.  Lets do it with more... civility.  The European economy is sclerosed.  No growth.  A monetary crisis.  And too much regulations that suffocates free enterprises.  Thus high level of welfare and no way out.  BUT!  Lets say you establish a friendship with a country.  Lets call it... I don't know... lets say... Mali.  You tell the president that he will have full power on his land.  That the country's sovereignty will be preserved and defended by the mighty European army (aka the French).  And after such a climax of peace and harmony is established (we know that this is the kind of climax that attracts investors).  The deal is that the president will allow European capital (aka French capital) to establish factories in Mali.  Produce locally, thus creating local jobs and raising local people's wealth.  And those low cost products can come back to Europe through French entreprises and challenge the economic bully that is in place (aka Germany).

Interesting thought.  The future shall tell us.  In time.   

But for now.  Lets fight for freedom and democracy.